ANCEUS. 173 
friend, A. H. Haliday, Esq., communicated to us spe- 
cimens both of Anceus and Praniza, which he had first 
taken in 1847, on the shores of Strangford Lough, in 
the North of Ireland, in some numbers, and in equal 
proportions, in the summer, although in the month of 
February the Pranize were much less abundant than the 
Ancei. Mr. Haliday’s specimens were taken in small 
cavities in the surface of the clay, under stones, some- 
times singly, oftener two, and even three and four in 
each hole; the smaller green ones were few in com- 
parison. The new-born young of the Praniza have all 
the characteristic form of the parent, but the posterior 
thoracic segments not so completely confounded to- 
gether.* 
Referring to M. Hesse’s memoir, Mr. Haliday ob- 
served in his communication to us, that ‘ notwithstand- 
ing their constant association, and the fact that the 
Anceus is always of pretty uniform size, and Praniza 
varies from about the same down to the smallest size, 
I should never have guessed that the latter was the larva 
of the former; and yet I do not understand how to com- 
bine it with my positive observation of Praniza producing 
young—the very eyes of which (before birth) were 
visible through the transparent integuments of the 
parent.” We are able fully to confirm this statement, 
as some of Mr. Haliday’s specimens of the Pranize still 
exhibit the mass of eggs within the incubatory pouch, 
and from others the minute young have escaped in the 
spirit in which they are preserved. 
Mr. A. White, in his ‘ Popular History of British 
Crustacea,” 1857, still further confused the matter by 
observing that ‘ there is some likelihood that Anceus may 
prove to be one of the stages of Praniza.” 
* Annals Nat. Hist. 1848, vol, i. p. 65. 
